Is Zoroastrianism a proselytizing religion?
After extensive field study (on going)on Zoroastrianism in ancient China, I have revised my earlier opinion and came to conclusion that indeed Zoroastrianism is a proselytizing religion. The main reason is there is s nothing in the scriptures that prevents it. There is no historical findings that proves otherwise. There were quite a number of Chinese who were converted in ancient China by SABAO= ZOROASTRIAN CONVERTING PRIESTS AND EVEN MOGUs = HIGH PRIESTS CAME FROM PERSIA TO ESTABLISH PARISHES FOR TRAINING PRIESTS TO BECOME THE CONVERTING PRIESTS
THE TANG DYNASTY AND SONG DYNASTY ARISTICRATES AND ROYAL HOUSE HOLDS were converted to Zoroastrianism. The proofs are already provided from archeological excavations of several Fire Temples. Several leading Chinese scholars asked me that if Zarathushtra had not converted Vistaspa and his the royal family, Zoroastriainism would not have been heard of and would not have spread from Sogdiana to Northern China. It was only in India that conversion was looked down and it is a SOCIAL PROBLEM.
From the Gathas,Younger Avesta, Achemenian Inscritions to late Pahlavi literature, there is not a single statement that Conversion is prohibited. One instance of pointing Jasme Avenge Mazda that Mazdayasno Ahmi Mazdayasno Zarthushtri prevents conversions but if one sees Vendidad at several places only the word Mazdayasna occurs without Zaratheushtis.
Jadiv Rana’s promise of non-converting has no legs to stand because Jadiv Rana never existed, no geneaology of such person is on record or ever found.
I think this short note is sufficient.
Dr. Pallan Ichaporia